• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

Is a Jimmy Page CA a Historic

Old-Guy

New member
Joined
Mar 9, 2003
Messages
591
Hey Gang I"m a recent owner of 05 JPP 267 CA I know they state the board is not braz but my 03 R7 #73 137 with a braz looks and smells Identical of course the necks and fretboard are totaly different as well as the fret wires. So would this giutar be considered a Historic? The Pups are completely different sounding than my R7 even with out pulling the tone pot up I find the JPP to be much brighter on the Neck and more bottom on the bridge. The neck PUP on my JPP says its a BB-2 but the bridge dosn'thave the same wire leads and is signed by some guy named PS and it has a four wire lead. In closing all I can say is that it weighs in the postal scale from work at 8.1 lbs and the shaved neck is very cool.


Thx O-G
 

Old-Guy

New member
Joined
Mar 9, 2003
Messages
591
Oh Yeah Heres a crapy pic


JPP267.jpg


O-G
 

burstman59

New member
Joined
Mar 10, 2002
Messages
1,753
Old-Guy
I'd say its a Historic since its built in the Historic division but the specs are way different that a regular 59 reissue. The more I see these the more I want one but I dont like most of the tops. The flame travels upward too much on the bass side of the top on most of them. On Pages # 1 the flame on the bass side doesnt chevron upward as much it is only slightly upward. They are cool nonetheless.
 

class5lp

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
1,629
Hi Old-Guy,
I own Page number 146 which as you probably know is part of of the original 175 guitars that were Murphy aged and Jimmy Page played the first 25 guitars of this run and owns number 1 of the run. I have been told by my dealer as well as a Gibson Custom Shop employee I met at the plant on a recent tour and these guitars are not considered historics by Gibson because the fall into the signature series line of Gibson. Besides that historics are supossed to be a close reproduction to an original 59 (debateable) and Pages guitars has many mods to it. I hear what you are saying and I consider my own to be kind of a historic as it is a 59 signautre model with Pages mods done to it. I guess it all in how interpet it but I would never sell one of these guitars and list them as a historic.
Class5
 

BIG Dave

Active member
Joined
Aug 18, 2001
Messages
2,421
Whatever Gibson says, if it's made by the Historic Division, then it should be of the same quality as any other Historic-built Gibson. Since it's an upper priced model over the "standard" R9, I would expect it to be given even better attention to build quality.
 

murkat

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
492
since most of us has modded our historics (pups/caps/pots/etc.) Like JP, then I guess our historics are no longer historics as well ? hee hee
 

bluesjuke

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
7,007
murkat said:
since most of us has modded our historics (pups/caps/pots/etc.) Like JP, then I guess our historics are no longer historics as well ? hee hee


Oh you've got a lot of nerve improving your personal instrument.
Don't you know crappy linear taper pots will be the rage in the future?
 
Top